You know what? Maybe it's because Japan fascinates me and I never had the previlege of actually being there but I really enjoyed reading this. The previous article had his typical arrogant tone but it was still interesting and this one is actually a good read.

That'd be really silly, Alisha. Informed opinions, even if we don't like them, are worth considering. I may out and out hate Tim's other column (the one this thread was originally about), but at least he's proven that another side of him exists; one which likes various aspects of the culture. It doesn't relieve him of the serious issues with the original post, but at least it balances things out.

That'd be really silly, Alisha. Informed opinions, even if we don't like them, are worth considering. I may out and out hate Tim's other column (the one this thread was originally about), but at least he's proven that another side of him exists; one which likes various aspects of the culture. It doesn't relieve him of the serious issues with the original post, but at least it balances things out.

If you read Tim's original article, he only shows one side of things. The article reinforces negative ideas about Japan; from the title, right through to his closing thoughts. Now it's clear from the second article that Tim doesn't really feel so one-sided, but anyone reading the first piece would say that Tim doesn't like Japan very much.

Part of it, I suspect, as made to capitalise on the general "Japan sucks" phase parts of the gaming and internet-savvy subcultures are going through. Where Japan was "cool" in the mid-90's through early 2000's, the whole "weaboo" thing has definitely left a bad taste in some people's mouths. Since negativity is eternally fashionable (especially the type that reeks of smug, ultra-indie posturing), it's something to buy into for controversy's sake.

Consider that if Tim had published the article some years ago, he'd be treated as a pariah. If he publishes it a few years from now, he'll be late to the game. Right now is the perfect time to hate on Japan. At its best, the first article sells itself to people who're concerned about seeing the seams and getting a more balanced view on things. At its worst, the haters, racists, and 4channers will eat it up like candy.

Now, why did Tim publish the second article? Well, even if Japan isn't so popular, there are two reasons I can easily discern to do something like this. First, I'll go out on a limb and say that Tim isn't an out-and-out bastard. He's got a heart, and I'm sure he can recognise that his first article probably gave people the wrong impression. He could run with the first and position himself as the anti-Japan guy, championing the cause against weaboo mentality, but I'm going to guess he's a bigger man than that.

Secondly, I'll bet that Tim knows it's bad PR for Kotaku to be hating on Japan. Firstly because their name is Kotaku and clearly aimed at certain demographics, and also because there are companies from said Pacific island that would not be too happy with an editor onboard who flames their homeland.

Between what I hope is good humanity and practical thinking, Tim posted the second article to help balance out the first. But the first has some big problems, with its negative tone and its sensationalist language. The problem with articles like this, for good or ill, is that people use anecdotal stories as a means of informing their worldviews, as well as living vicariously. If you don't balance things out, you can leave someone with a negative impression of something they would be better off seeing both sides of. It's not true for all things, but in this case, it is.

Just as another point, there's also the issue that some things Tim points out as Japanese absurdities are actually universal issues, which would bother him "back home" if he was exposed to them as a foreigner. Consider this:

"There's nothing quite so delicious as a cold beer after a hard day of work!"

The whole thing about template conversations is hardly Japanese. I can go into a bar in Toronto, sit down, and listen to a bunch of guys talk about tits and beer for an hour. I can leave that bar, go into another, and hear the exact same conversation, almost word for word. The reason I notice it and Tim doesn't? He may not be looking. I get tired of these kinds of conversations very quickly, and I absolutely despise the sexism and alcoholism associated with the above in particular.

Of course, we're used to hearing these conversations, so even for me -- noticing it as often as I do -- they fade into the background. Sometimes, you even find yourself in them. But Tim's hearing them through the ears of a foreigner. They're not natural to him. Not yet. Were he to stay long enough in the country? I'm sure he'd stop picking them out altogether.

From what I understand, you have a problem with his article merely because currently it's 'cool' and 'hip' to hate on Japan, which is a paper thin argument, at best, and completely absurd, at worst. Just because a trend is going a certain way, does not mean that anything written that can conveniently be classified into that trend, fairly or not, is automatically bullshit. For example, it's currently the trend that China should be painted as an enemy to anything American. Should a well-written article analyzing and critiquing Chinese domestic policies be automatically classified as racist, judgmental, knee-jerk sensationalism? Of course not; to do so would be intensely idiotic and disingenuous.

You seem to have chosen select parts of his complaints and applied your own reasoning to them; which is, frankly, insane. It almost seems that the only thing anyone is allowed to write about Japan HAS to be positive, according to you. You state that there are 'obvious problems' but despite saying so, at the root of it, you have offered barely anything as to WHY there are serious problems, only that there are, and you refuse to elaborate further. You seem to have nothing but praise for the positive article, which I find incredibly biased.

By the way, there aren't just two extremes, Weeaboo and Anti-Weeaboo, there are people who are actually IN THE MIDDLE, who are actively aware that Weeaboos are idiotic douches and anti-Weeaboos are basically racists. It seems more like Tim is that type of person. It doesn't help that anyone who sees the article is basically HOW DARE HE INSULT MIGHTY NIPPON, 99% of whom probably have not even set foot in the damn country.

Nowhere did I praise the new article, only said that it balanced out the old one.

Nowhere did I say it was wrong to dislike elements of Japanese culture, only that it was wrong to present a one-sided view.

I gave you a nice specific example about the "template conversations" bit and talked about the psychological distance with regards to a foreign culture versus a native on. I'd say that's fair elaboration on the article itself. I put forward why the article can be suspect for its intentions, given the trends currently (I'm not willing to believe it's mere coincidence, timing-wise). I also put forward that I do not believe Tim is an out-and-out bastard (re-quoting myself here), and that the second article proves that.

Quote

You seem to have chosen select parts of his complaints and applied your own reasoning to them; which is, frankly, insane.

This statement is insane. Since I'm not doing a formal bloody analysis with weeks/months/years of research and debate applied, the very nature of a critique becomes what you have described. You choose parts of an article, discuss them using your own reasoning (I can't very well use someone else's!), and go from there.

I don't know what has a crank up your ass other than wanting to play devil's advocate against me, but my lord you must have glossed over my response hastily. :P

I don't know what has a crank up your ass other than wanting to play devil's advocate against me, but my lord you must have glossed over my response hastily. :P

Well, Leyviur did pretty much the same thing when the first article surfaced and a lot of us said it's fine to criticize Japan because there's a heck of a lot wrong with it, but that the way the article was written was very much out of whack. At least Tim redeemed himself for the most part with this article by presenting the other side of things. Although a tirade against and a saccharine follow-up thesis seems a bit odd to me.

Logged

It's never too late to start learning; it's always too early to stop learning.

I don't know what has a crank up your ass other than wanting to play devil's advocate against me, but my lord you must have glossed over my response hastily. :P

Well, Leyviur did pretty much the same thing when the first article surfaced and a lot of us said it's fine to criticize Japan because there's a heck of a lot wrong with it, but that the way the article was written was very much out of whack. At least Tim redeemed himself for the most part with this article by presenting the other side of things. Although a tirade against and a saccharine follow-up thesis seems a bit odd to me.

I dunno... I felt the second article was too much of "an apology for the sake of an apology". It didn't feel no where near as convincing (in accordance to the author's beliefs) as the first one.

I'm not trying to say anyone is right or wrong; I'm glad everyone here was so apt and willing to dissect the article so thoroughly! I <3 RPGfan! :D